Bluestem Prairie: news about Tim Walz (MN-1)

Wednesday digest: waspy Buddha nest buzz edition

Yet another suggestion that Southern Minnesota is on the cutting edge of the universe. The Rochester Post Bulletin reports that local Monks see Buddha in wasp nest:

Experts are skeptical, but the Cambodian Buddhist community is abuzz over what they believe is a miracle at their temple in southeast Rochester: A wasp nest in the shape of a seated Buddha.

The nest, which is nestled in the eaves high above the entry to the Buddhists' one-story gathering hall, was spotted last week during a large celebration in which community members give monks new robes.

"Instead of the celebration we were having, we were paying attention to the beehive," said 35-year-old monk Sokunthea Thun.

Elder members of the Cambodian Buddhist community said they have never seen an apparition of the Buddha in their lifetimes.

"The Buddha is trying to tell everybody to seek peace in their lives," said 70-year-old Voeun Sor of Rochester, a Cambodia native who has lived in the United States for 20 years.

The location of the nest is typical for paper wasps, said Kirk Payne, a naturalist at Quarry Hill Nature Center in Rochester.

"They'll make a comb that can be kind of be wave-like," he said. "I can imagine how they could make a shape like an undulating, Buddha-like figure." . . .

. . .The Buddha wasn't trying to send a message with the nests, but the insects were trying to communicate a Buddhist message, Thun said.

"Bees can do this kind of miracle, so humans can also do miracles," he said. "Everywhere in this world, we humans need to follow in the bees' path to make peace and serenity."

Were world history more shaped by those serene wasps, we might not need a Veterans Day. Instead, we take a day to remember the sting of sacrifice.  In Veterans Day tradition continues at courthouse on Owatonna, the Owatonna People's Press reports:

Newly re-elected U.S. Rep. Tim Walz, D-Minn., also made a stop into the American Legion Tuesday to pay his tributes to Owatonna veterans.

“Every year we try to get to as many of these as we can,” Walz said.

Walz, a 24-year veteran of the Army National Guard traveled from a Veterans Day celebration in Waseca as he was on his way to spend the afternoon in St. Paul with hospitalized veterans.

More about Waseca vets from KEYC-TV in  New Generation of Veterans Take Up  Duty at VFW. The Waseca County News takes a close look at one reservist's experience in To Iraq and back: A young soldier’s life in the military.

Former State Senator Steve Kelley raises some interesting alternatives in Minnesota needs to adopt a majority-vote requirement. The MinnPost piece originally appeared in the St. Paul Legal Ledger Capitol Report. The New Ulm Journal suggests a tongue-in-cheek solution for dueling Coleman and Franken press releases in Maybe a gag order would be in order.

In honor of Rochester's diligent paper wasps, a lovely song by The National:

Where does Brian Davis stand on AARP's issues?

AARP, formerly the American Association of Retired Persons,describes itself as "a nonprofit, nonpartisan membership organization for people age 50 and over ... dedicated to enhancing quality of life for all as we age."  It claims 38 million members nationwide.

The group has just issued its Minnesota Voters Guide. According to the group's website:

Each election year, AARP asks major candidates in selected races key questions about the issues most important to our members and their families. Candidates are allowed up to 125 words to answer each question. AARP does not edit or modify the candidates’ answers to our questions. In addition, AARP provides a summary of our position for each of the issues addressed.

Given the power of the older voter (people in the 50+ age group are among those groups with the highest voter turnout), candidates tend to answer the questionnaire by the deadline.

Brian Davis, the Republican candidate running in Minnesota's First Congressional district, didn't respond on time.

Voters looking to the guide for Davis's positions on social security, retirement security, affordable health care, long-term care, and making a commitment "to help end gridlock by working across party lines to develop and support common-sense, bipartisan solutions on health care and financial security" are simply out of luck.

Here's the link to the AARP Voters Guide for 2008 Minnesota, US House District 1 for those who want to learn Congressman Walz's positions.

The only other instance of  2008 major party candidates runnning for federal office who didn't answer is in the Fourth with both Ed Matthews and Betty McCollum not responding. We have no idea what they were thinking.

Photo: Congressman Walz and seniors in a Mankato town hall meeting, from the Mankato Free Press.

Walz campaign: Owatonna residents oppose Davis intent to privatize social Security

Another press release from the Walz campaign:

Owatonna Citizens Oppose Dr. Brian Davis’ Plan to Gamble Social Security on the Stock Market

In light of recent turmoil in the U.S. stock market, a group of Owatonna citizens held a press conference today to oppose 1^st District Congressional candidate Dr. Brian Davis’ plans to gamble Social Security on the stock market.

“As a retiree, I depend on Social Security to make ends meet,” said Sondra Von Arb, an Owatonna senior. “I don’t want Social Security gambled away on the stock market. Dr. Brian Davis’ plan to privatize Social Security is wrong for southern Minnesotans like me.”

Dr. Davis has routinely expressed support for some privatization of Social Security and has pledged to follow the MN Republican Party platform, which promotes privatization of Social Security for Americans of all ages.

“In this economy, we can’t afford Dr. Brian Davis’ plan to risk Social Security on the stock market,” said Lisa Heggedahl, a farmer in Hayfield. “I am paying into the system and will be paying for years to come. I want to know that when I retire, Social Security will be there for me.”

“Ordinary, middle-class Americans rely on Social Security to make ends meet,” said Richard Hackerson, a semi-retired Owatonna resident. “Dr. Davis’ willingness to gamble that away in the stock market shows that he is the wrong person for southern Minnesota . We need Tim Walz in Congress because he will oppose any attempt to privatize Social Security.”

Davis Said He Supported The Privatization Of Social Security. Davis said, “I do believe that people below a certain age should have the option to invest some of their Social Security in the private market.” [Winona Youth GOP Debate, 2/23/08, full transcription available on request]

Davis Said If You Want to Know Where He Stood on an Issue to Look at the Republican Party Platform. Davis said, “I want to reassure you that I’m a conservative platform republican I will cast those votes and I will advocate on behalf of our causes. I think our Republican Party platform in this state is great. Do you want to know where I stand; you can start with that document.” [Fillmore Co GOP Convention, full transcription available on request]

Republican Party Platform of MN (http://www.mngop.com/Roots/8a6031ab-af02-4ff7-b4375db06581aaea/Documents/2008%20RPM%20Platform.pdf)

Republican Party Platform Section 1, Letter P (Page 2): Allowing all Americans to invest some or all of their Social Security payments, continuing to fulfill our obligations to older Americans, and prohibiting Congress from using Social Security funds for any other purpose.

We would also like to draw our readers' attention to a long comment retired accountant  McPherson Hall on Minnesota Central left at our post, Does Matt Stolle of the Post Bulletin want voters in the dark about Davis's positions?:

Mr. Stolle:

Have you heard (or read) the September 24 story on KAAL ? The discussion concerned Social Security and Davis says privatizing, or allowing some of the payroll taxes to be invested, would be one way to help.
"So let's say 40% or 50% of payroll taxes could be included into a secure type of even a 403B plan, which would be bonds and securities that are very stable," says Davis.

  Yes, some citizens are concerned ... rightfully ... and they may support Congressman Walz, but KAAL asked the question.

I am concerned with your paragraph "The program's trustees have projected that Social Security will begin paying out more benefits than receipts in 2017. It will be financially exhausted in 2041."

Are you aware that the in August, the Congressional Budget Office issued an updated report on the Social Security funding requirements. The report, which forecasts out 75 years, finds that while the accumulating surpluses in the trust fund will be exhausted in 2049, ongoing revenues will still be sufficient to fund about 81% of promised benefits at the end of the 75-year period (in 2082). Further, the CBO report says, “future Social Security beneficiaries will receive larger benefits in retirement…than current beneficiaries do, even after adjustments have been made for inflation.”

Dr. Davis may be taking a preemptive strike since he knows that one way to increase funding for the reserve is to increase the taxable cap rate. Interesting that Dr. Davis, who is capped on how much he contributes to Social Security (currently set at $102,000 and in 2007, Davis was paid $411,780), is willing to allow workers to accept some risk.

Also I am confused with Davis comment "the Democrats have been taking money out of that". To my understanding Social Security reserve is still being funded ... and the Government's overall balance sheet is not in as bad a position because of the positive balance in the SS reserve. This has been the case forever ... and some of your readers will recall the Bush/Gore debate over how to whether a "lockbox" should be established so that the Government does not imply a better fiscal year statement by not recognizing the positive impact of Social Security overfunding. The overall fiscal balance sheet would look worse if the reserve for Social Security payments weren't used to offset other funding (such as Iraq). Why is Davis blaming the Democrats when President Bush and Congressional Republicans share some of the blame ?

But the good thing is that these citizens that prompted your article are addressing a concern. Let's not be so quick to minimize their concerns ... if Davis is elected, at least voters know what his plans are.

More kudos for Walz: NFU Golden Triangle Award

The Minnesota Ag Connection reports that Klobuchar, Peterson, Walz receive Farmers Union Golden Triangle Award:

Senator Amy Klobuchar, Congressman Collin Peterson, and Congressman Tim Walz receive the National Farmers Union 2008 Golden Triangle Award. The annual award is the farm organization's highest legislative honor and presented to members of Congress who have demonstrated leadership on issues relevant to America's family farmers, ranchers and rural communities.

"Minnesotans are very fortunate to have Senator Klobuchar, Chairman Peterson, and Congressman Walz in Congress fighting for rural America," said Doug Peterson, Minnesota Farmers Union President. "All three of these members are repeat recipients of this award, and I want to thank them for their hard work and dedication, and look forward to continuing to work with them on the issues that impact farmers and ranchers in Minnesota."

This year's golden triangle recipients were selected for their leadership on a variety of issues, including: support for the 2008 Farm Bill, implementing mandatory country-of-origin labeling (COOL), increasing the use and production of fuels from the farm, addressing food safety concerns, support for fair trade and agriculture's role in addressing climate change.

The Golden Triangle Award is based on NFU's symbol -- a triangle with "legislation" and "cooperation" forming the sides and "education" the base. The Golden Triangle Awards have been presented annually since 1988.

In another issue important to rural voters, the Post Bulletin's Matt Stolle reports in the paper's Political Notebook:

NRA endorses Walz

Democratic Congressman Tim Walz scored a political coup last week, receiving the endorsement of the National Rifle Association's Political Action Fund.

The Walz campaign was clearly pleased with the development since the organization typically gives its endorsement to Republicans, which are often thought of as the NRA's staunchest supporters. A Walz aide cited the endorsement as proof of the freshman congressman's centrist orientation and ability to work in a bipartisan fashion. The campaign also says it rebuts the Republican charge that Walz is a Pelosi Democrat who supports San Francisco values and not southern Minnesota values.

"During his first term in the House, Congressman Walz consistently supported the constitutional rights of law-abiding gun owners and sportsman and demonstrated a strong commit to the second amendment and our country's rich hunting heritage," said Chris W. Cox, chairman of NRA-PVF. "Because of his unwavering pro-gun support, Tim Walz earned an 'A' rating and an endorsement from NRA-PVF."

We hope Congressman Walz gets a chance to do some pheasant hunting--following the election, of course. Birds are plentiful from what we see on the back roads.

About that ABCNews poll: what Americans want in an energy policy

A new poll is out about American opinion on solutions for high energy prices, the Washington Post reports in Most Favor New Drilling, Taxes on Oil Profits.

Our readers will probably be hearing a lot about this poll from the GOP, with the suggestion, as per the WaPo, that it supports their positions alone.

That's definitely not the case when one looks at the details of the poll and the actual positions taken by MN-01 congressional candidates.

The WaPo spins the polling to the right:

Nearly two-thirds of Americans now put a priority on "finding new sources of energy" over improving conservation -- a significant shift since 2001 -- and majorities support all of the five potential federal initiatives tested in a new ABC News poll.  

There is overwhelming backing for stricter fuel efficiency standards, as large majorities of Democrats, Republicans and independents alike line up behind the idea. There is also widespread support across party lines for a more controversial proposal in the battle over energy policy: offshore oil drilling.

Overall, 63 percent want the federal government to lift its embargo on new drilling in U.S. coastal waters. Nearly eight in 10 Republicans and seven in 10 independents back the idea, as do just over half of Democrats in the poll conducted in partnership with Stanford University and Planet Green.

If you read only that article, you'd come anyway with a blurry snapshot of the ABCNews poll--a distorted snapshot of a snapshot, as it were.

For a more in-depth review of the poll--with less of the WaPo's patented "this is good news for Republicans"  spin (it always is in the WaPo's world), we recommend the far more indepth coverage over at ABC News, Fuel Costs Boost Conservation Efforts; 7 in 10 Reducing 'Carbon Footprint.' The twenty page pdf report on the survey is far more helpful for understanding what Americans want than the Washington Post article. We recommend that our readers check it out.

If this poll can be interpreted as representative of Southern Minnesota (a risky venture, indeed, as anyone familiar with scientific polling can vouch), we speculate this poll is not good news for Brian Davis.

We've clipped and reproduced the chart at the head of this post in order to illustrate our bold point. What federal policy initiative drew the most supporters? According to the survey, seventy-eight percent of those polled favored "increasing fuel efficiency standards."

Congressman Walz voted to do so in the 2007 energy bill.  One of the cornerstones of Brian Davis's energy policy is to repeal fuel efficiency (CAFE) standards. In a January email to supporters, Davis proposed:

Eliminating current automobile mileage standards and government-imposed production mandates. The free market and the laws of supply and demand work much better than our government attempting to mandate conservation and setting quotas.

Americans overwhelmingly disagree with Davis's extreme stance on CAFE standards, and the moderate McPherson Hall at Minnesota Central readily debunked Davis's ideological assessment in early June in In MN-01 Davis opposes mandates but what about subsidies?:

The history of CAFE (Corporate Average Fuel Economy) is pretty short. The first mandate was part of the “Energy Policy Conservation Act,” enacted into law by Congress in 1975 which was passed in response to the 1973-74 Arab oil embargo. The next major change will be affected by the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 after President Bush requested the first increase in CAFE standards in January. The legislation was overwhelmingly approved by Congress including including Minnesota’s Norm Coleman and 36 other Republican Senators. It will require in part that automakers boost fleetwide gas mileage to 35 mpg by the year 2020.

Davis contention that were “little success” are disputed by a committee of the National Academy of Sciences who wrote a 2002 report on the effects of the CAFE standard. The report’s conclusions include a finding that in the absence of CAFE, and with no other fuel economy regulation substituted, motor vehicle fuel consumption would have been approximately 14 percent higher than it actually was in 2002.

Next, sixty-three percent of Americans want the embargoes on offshore drilling lifted. H.R. 6709, which Congressman Walz helped draft, would lift many restrictions on offshore drilling, directing the royalties toward energy research, conservation and environmental restoration. (The poll also says that Americans still look favorably on environmentally-inclined candidates).

Walz, along with nearly two-dozen colleagues, joined the bipartisan House Energy Working Group and helped draft H.R. 6709. The one constant for membership was a commitment to allow more offshore drilling. Walz supports doing so provided is part of a bipartisan comprehensive energy solution."that includes conservation, speeds up development of new affordable fuels and cracks down on speculation."

According to the ABCNews survey, sixty-one percent of Americans support efforts to curb speculation, so Walz and the Energy Working Group are not alone in their desire to cool it down. Republican challenger Dick Day told the Star Tribune he supports such efforts, while Brian Davis opposed them.

Fifty-five percent of Americans want oil companies to pay higher taxes, equal to the percentage that wants to drill in wilderness areas. Davis and Day are now highlighting their support of drilling in ANWR, but we don't recall hearing much about the equally popular option of raising taxes on oil companies.

There's more. Go read the whole thing--for there's more bad news for Davis in the poll. Davis insists that there's no connection between human activity and climate change. Find out what those surveyed thought the government's position should be.

As we noted at the beginning of this post, we'll be hearing a lot about this poll in the coming days--and we suspect that much of it will be digested and spun out as more horse apples in the First. Go read it and be informed.

Mankato Free Press: Permanent tax cuts or veterans' benefits?

An interesting editorial in today's Mankato Free Press:

Budgets passed recently by the U.S. Senate and the House of Representatives indicate in part a willingness to increase much needed funding to veterans programs and pay for that, in part, by allowing some tax breaks to the wealthiest Americans to expire.

The U.S. House of Representatives and the U.S. Senate recently passed budgets that boost funding for veterans’ health care and other veterans’ needs at amounts higher than the Bush Administration’s proposal. The Bush budget boosts total VA funding by about 1.6 percent, or $1.7 billion.

The House bill adds about $600 million to the Bush proposal, which would bolster overall spending to about 2.6 percent. The Senate adds $3 billion, making the overall spending increase about 5 percent.

Many veterans groups have favored the congressional proposals saying the number of veterans entering the VA health system from wars in Iraq and Afghanistan warrants the extra funding.

In fact, Congress and the president in the most recent fiscal year boosted VA funding by an “emergency” $3.7 billion appropriation midway through the budget year after seeing tremendous increases in health care costs for veterans returning from Iraq and Afghanistan. That figure is close to the increase being proposed by Bush.

The funding is aimed at not only taking care of the increase in VA patients, but also aimed at reducing, for example, the time it takes for the VA to process a disability claim. In 2007, it took 183 days to process a claim. That figure dropped to 169 days in 2008 and the current budget aims to bring that down to 145 days. That’s still a long time to wait for veterans who may have no other way to earn money when they are disabled.

The Bush budget also cuts medical research by 10 percent for the VA and major construction projects budget is cut by 50 percent. Both are restored to some extent in the House and Senate budgets.

The House budget, to its credit, is operating on its paygo rules that require spending offsets for new spending by letting the Bush tax cuts of 2001 expire for those earning upwards of $300,000. That supports some of the increases in domestic programs such as Veterans administration.

The national office of the Veterans of Foreign Wars says the Bush budget is a good start but “demands” Congress up the funding for construction projects and medical research. The research funding would go toward what VFW national president George Lisicki calls the “signature wounds of war.” That research would help the VA better treat traumatic brain injuries, post traumatic stress disorder, prosthetics and improve treatments for burns and blind rehabilitation.

The VFW also opposes Bush Administration plans to create annual enrollment fees of $250 to $750 for non-service connected disabled veterans. It would also increase co-pays for medicine from $8 to $15 per 30-day supply.

The cost of the Bush tax cuts are significant when compared to the VA budget needs. One tenth of the revenue from removing just tax breaks to hedge fund managers would fund the increase in the VA that Congress is proposing.

The most fun of all: Walz's 2007 year end report shows $842,504.05 cash at hand

And last but certainly not least, the Walz campaign committee 2007 year-end report has been filed with the FEC. Cash is hand at the end of the year: $842,504.05.  The finally tally of the receipts:

	Column A This Period	Column B Election Cycle-To-Date	Column C Post-Election
I. RECEIPTS
11. Contributions (other than loans) From:
(a) Individuals/Persons Other than Political Committees
(i) Itemized	83744.01
(ii) Unitemized	45434.50
(iii) Total Of Contributions From Individuals	129178.51	616211.68	0.00
(b) Political Party Commitees	4049.00	8364.48	0.00
(c) Other Political Committees (such as PACS)	116430.91	503855.12	0.00
(d) The Candidate	0.00	0.00	0.00
(e) Total Contributions (11(a)(iii) + (b) + (c))	249658.42	1128431.28	0.00
12. Transfers From Other Authorized Committees	0.00	0.00	0.00
13. Loans
(a) Made Or Guaranteed By The Candidate	0.00	0.00	0.00
(b) All Other Loans	0.00	85912.66	0.00
(c) Total Loans ((a) + (b))	0.00	85912.66	0.00
14. Offsets to Operating Expenditures (Refunds, Rebates, etc)	456.44	63916.05	0.00
15. Other Receipts	568.33	1660.38	0.00
16. Total Receipts (11(e) + 12 + 13(c) + 14 + 15)	250683.19	1279920.37	0.00

Saturday, Dec. 1 Senior Federation Medicare Forum with Congressman Walz

Update: November 25:  We have just learned that  Congressman Walz will not be at this forum.

However, it's a good program, with or without Walz.

Via Air America's calendar page:

On Saturday December 1st, join the Minnesota Senior Federation for a free Congressional Forum on Medicare at the Minnetonka Community Center. Congressman Tim Walz will be there, as well as other speakers and vendors who will provide information on Medicare. There will also be individual counseling available at the fair (also available any time of the year!)

This forum will be a great opportunity to learn new things about Medicare, meet some experts and get information that is specific to your needs.

Saturday, December 1, 2007 - 8:30 a.m. to noon
A Congressional Forum on Medicare
Minnetonka Community Center
14600 Minnetonka Blvd
Minnetonka MN 55345
Contact: 952/939-8390

The Seniors Federation web site has more details on the event (links added by BSP):

On Saturday, Dec. 1, the Medicare Justice Coalition (MJC), Minnesota Senior Federation, Minnesota Office of AARP, and the Minnesota division of the Alliance of Retired Americans will host a congressional roundtable to present critical issues surrounding needed Medicare changes.

The 9 a.m.-noon event will offer seniors and others concerned about Medicare changes an occasion to listen, learn and ask the experts. Participants will be able to speak with congressional leaders and learn about various Medicare insurance plans from insurance providers. Attendees will also learn how MJC and other grassroots organizations are working at the legislative level to help protect older Minnesotans from inequitable changes in health care and prescription drug policies.

Featured speakers include G. Richard Geier, Jr., MD, president of the Minnesota Medical Association. Geier will address the consequences of a proposed 10 percent cut in reimbursement for physicians who care for Medicare patients. Janet E. Witt, MS, RD, will speak to concerns surrounding prescription drugs for Medicare patients. Witt represents the National Committee to Preserve Social Security and Medicare. Other topics for discussion will include changes in Medicare Parts B and D, hospital payment problems and why it’s crucial that MJC and other senior organizations present a strong voice for consumers. 

Members of the Medicare Justice Coalition represent consumers, payers and health care providers working together to equalize Medicare benefits; establish reimbursement equity between HMOs and the traditional fee-for-service; and advocate for a Medicare system that rewards quality rather than simply quantity.

No bases loaded: First Congressional District GOP fundraising

Hat tip to DJ at I Don't Hate America for motivating us to take a closer look at third quarter fundraising.

He's taken a close look at Brian Davis's superficially strong fundraising for the quarter. Go read his analysis of the report.  DJ's work inspired us to look again at the 4-pak:

Candidate        Individual  Contributions (cycle)           Self-funded            

Dick Day              $123,222                                              $30,000   

Notes: Most contributors are Minnesota residents; GOP base;  district contributions skewed toward Owatonna/Rochester area.

Brian Davis           $59,835                                               $38,493

Notes: All but 15 contributors from out-of-state; little base giving from district or state; several base donors also gave to other candidates in race.  MN count includes candidate and spouse.

Randy Demmer     $35,480                                              $115,000

Notes: Nearly all funds from district and then state; little out of state cash; district contributions also   centered around candidate's home base

Mark Meyer          $10,000                                               $750

Notes: Local and Twin Cities contributors

What does this mean? First, of all, Dick Day is the only candidate to even kindle a spark with the

Republican base. In the absence of public endorsements and letters listing support from likely delegates, individual contributions are probably the most reliable benchmark for measuring a candidate's success at this stage of the game.

Secondly, while Brian Davis's Q3 fundraising--flowing largely from fellow radiologists radiation oncologists from around the country--were superficially impressive, a closer look shows little support within the district or even his home base, Rochester and the Mayo Clinic.  Only seven physicians from Mayo support the good doctor in amounts that trip the FEC's disclosure trigger; one of those doctors in Davis's spouse. Add in Davis himself, and the large contributor count's up to eight.

It's quite a contrast with the dozens of Mayo physicians, staff, and researchers DJ identified among Walz's FEC reports. Heck, Davis's take from his colleagues is tiny even when compared to the several dozen large contributions from Mayo's community that we found from combing through former Congressman Gutknechts' list from six terms in the House.

Of the five First District residents who gave large contributions ($200 or over) to Davis, three--Mark Neeb, Jack Remick, and Arthur Birdseye--also gave to either Day or Demmer.  From the rest of the state of Minnesota, Davis received large contributions from two people: Ellen and Rudy Boschwitz.

Mark Meyer trails the three Rochester area wannabes, and that brings us to another thing we've noticed: the paucity of large contributions to GOP contenders from outside of their stomping grounds. Granted, Rochester is the largest population center in the district, but the tally doesn't show much excitement even for Day and Demmer away from their hometowns.

What's more, after looking at the fundraising Dick Day did for the state-level Senate Victory Fund (pull down committee name from menu here) maintained by the Republican minority caucus in the state senate, it's also likely that he has contacts within the state's GOP contributor base. Davis may well have burned through his PA of med school and professional association contacts (many of whom won't form a contributor base for the 1st CD GOP if Davis fails to get the endorsement at the end of March).

In short, the endorsement contest looks like Dick Day's race to lose, regardless of how much Davis spins his out-of-state fundraising. Nor would we rule out Randy Demmer's appeal to the base, despite his dubious math abilities.

Meanwhile, Walz not only has the incumbent's advantage--however slight it might be for a freshman in a swing district--but the cash edge as well. For the cycle, Walz has received $481,053 in contributions, and those large enough to disclose are primarily from Minnesota. The district contributions come from throughout the district, not just Walz's home base of Mankato.  As is to be expected in a competitive seat,  his PAC contribution list is robust as well.

The 4-pak will have to spend their dollars in their bid to gain their own party's endorsement (we wouldn't be surprised if Meyer called it a day soon). Meanwhile, the Walz campaign can work on winning the election in November 2008, as it looks unlikely that a primary challenger will emerge.

A third party bid? It may be the GOP's last great hope in this race.

More on Monday's Minuteman meeting

Today's Rochester Post Bulletin has published reaction to Monday's "immigration reform" meeting in Austin, where a member of the Minutemen spoke to an angry crowd. State Senator Dick Day, a candidate for the GOP endorsement for the 2008 congressional race in the First, attended the meeting, according to news sources.

In an article, Austin mayor writes report on immigration, the PB reports:

As the immigration debate in Austin gets hotter, Mayor Tom Stiehm has made what he calls "an attempt to move forward" on the issue.

Stiehm issued a report on immigration Thursday to let residents know what to expect.

Stiehm was criticized Monday at a meeting sponsored by the Minnesota Coalition for Immigration Reduction and led by Ron Branstner, a Minuteman from California. Some people at the meeting said they felt Stiehm promised to rectify immigration to win election. Others wondered aloud why the mayor wasn't at the meeting.

"Tom Stiehm's flip-flop is documented," former Austin resident Don Hootch-Hanson said Monday. . . .

. . .Stiehm said he wasn't at Monday's immigration meeting because he was at a city council meeting. He said he's been to two previous immigration meetings, and "you don't really get to make points. You get to listen to them. When you try to respond, ... you basically get shot down. They don't want to hear what you have to say. ... I agree with them on a lot of things, there are some things I don't agree with them, and they are kind of intolerant when they hear you don't agree with them. But there are ways you could use their organization and their techniques."

More contact with the immigrant community is needed to figure out the goals of the city and how everyone can work together, Stiehm said.

UPDATE: KAAL-TV interviews the mayor of Austin in a news segment. In part:

. . .Austin Mayor Tom Stiehm, who campaigned on a platform of dealing with the city's illegal immigrants, has faced recent criticism.

Some organizers attempting to develop a strategy for dealing with illegal immigration in the city are upset that Stiehm missed a recent meeting.

So today the Mayor shared his views on how he thinks the city should deal with illegal immigrants.

He thinks the community should welcome immigrants who live and work peacefully in Austin…

"If people are here in Austin and not getting in trouble - we're not concerned about their legal status." ...

Go read or watch rest. [end update]

Carol Anthonisen, an Austin resident, writes in Racial hatred rears its ugly head in Austin:

. . .According to the article, Paul Westrum, a resident of Albert Lea and the founder of MCFIR, said the purpose of the meeting was to work on the immigration issue, which he said is not a racial issue but a legal one.

If this is true, then why are people in the crowd yelling things at Ms. Silvestry, like "send her back?" And why is this person saying things like "welcome to America" to someone, based on her ethnic/racial appearance?

The fact that her appearance is Hispanic/Latino does not mean she is an immigrant, let alone an illegal one.

"I've been here since I was born," responded Silvestry. . . .

. . .I agree that we need to enforce our current laws and strengthen our border patrols to reduce and prevent illegal immigration. I know there is no easy answer to what is to be done with the illegal immigrants who are already in our country. But meetings like the one hosted by this MCFIR group attract a certain element that is dissatisfied with things the way they are and will blame their problems on a group of people who happen to be of a certain ethnic or national origin.

These type of meetings focus people more toward increasing prejudice and bigotry. It's human nature to feel more empowered by being in a group, and this group is being empowered (intentionally or unintentionally) to stir hatred toward anyone who has immigrated to this country, illegally or legally. Examples? Some of the reported comments:

"The constitution is being taken away from us," shouted one person.

"This is going to be a third-world country soon," said another.

"Everyone in the world is going to come here," another said.

As one man was leaving, he suggested that the group "buy bullets."

Heaven help us if we start lending legitimacy to people who would suggest buying bullets as a solution to our problems. Has our society degenerated to the point where we think we need to kill our brothers and sisters because they exist in our country when we don't want them to? . . .

The comments posted after her column illustrate the problem she's talking about.  To learn more about the consequences of eliminationist rhetoric, we recommend the superlative West coast blog, Orcinus.

We're also puzzled why the press asks no questions about the Minuteman's expertise or background. As we noted in our earlier post on Tuesday, the speaker has no national reputation--and  a letter in the St. Cloud Times before Monday's meeting is his only prior appearance in the press on this issue.